IJCM_109A: Psychiatric Morbidity And Cognitive Functioning In The Institutionalized Elderly In Old Age Homes: A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The elderly is at a higher risk of developing certain psychiatric illnesses and deterioration of their cognitive functioning by virtue of the multidimensional phenomenon of ageing and other psychosocial factors, and this risk has found to only be higher in the institutionalized elderly. Studies in this regard, assessing the mental health of those residing in old age homes in India are lacking. Objective: To evaluate the psychiatric morbidities and cognitive functioning in the elderly who have been institutionalized in old age homes. Methodology: This study is a cross-sectional study, among 150 residents who are over 60 years of age in old age homes in Mangalore. Data is being collected by face to face interviews, using a sociodemographic proforma, Montreal cognitive assessment scale to assess the cognitive functioning and the Mini psychiatric interview to screen for any psychiatric morbidiy. Data will be analyzed using SPSS Version 25.0 [IBM Corp. Released 2017. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.], and a p value of Results: 87.30% and 29% of residents were found to have cognitive impairment and psychiatric morbidity respectively. The majority of those with cognitive impairment were found to have severe cognitive impairment (31.60%). Conclusion: Mood disorders (depression), in keeping with several other studies, was found to be the most common psychiatric morbidity, followed by psychotic disorder, anxiety and suicidality. In contrast to findings by Singh et al., psychiatric morbidities and cognitive impairment had no significant association with sociodemographic factors
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".